[plt-scheme] Smallest set of operators

On Feb 2, 2007, at 7:36 AM, Paulo J. Matos wrote:

> On 2/2/07, Matthias Felleisen <matthias at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
>>
>> 1. You need to specify what you mean with define.
>>
>
> define = implement.


This definition is naive. Just use ONE SINGLE combinator (X, see  
Barendregt) and you can compile EVERY language to it. -- Matthias




> So, you implement the set of scheme operators X.
> Scheme standard is built of operators in set Y. Question was: what's
> the minimal set X with which you can implement Y - X?
>
>> 2. If you mean "replace in situ" you probably want to read up o
>> "Expressive Power of Programming Languages." (Just google)
>>
>
> I'll check that!
>
>> 3. Scheme isn't that well-defined to really do the above. If you mean
>> interpreter+library, read Clinger, Friedman, Wand on algebraic
>> semantics.
>>
>
> Ok, thank you, I'll also look into it anyway.
>
> Paulo Matos
>
>> -- Matthias
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > --
>> > Paulo Jorge Matos - pocm at soton.ac.uk
>> > http://www.personal.soton.ac.uk/pocm
>> > PhD Student @ ECS
>> > University of Southampton, UK
>> > _________________________________________________
>> >  For list-related administrative tasks:
>> >  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Paulo Jorge Matos - pocm at soton.ac.uk
> http://www.personal.soton.ac.uk/pocm
> PhD Student @ ECS
> University of Southampton, UK
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme